Sanhedrin 72

כי קאמר רב כגון רב כהנא ורב אסי דלגמריה דרב הוו צריכי ולסבריה דרב לא הוו צריכי

— Rab referred to [disciples] such as R. Kahana and R. Assi who needed Rab's traditional teaching,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., laws transmitted down from Master to pupil. ');">¹</span> but not his reasoning.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the application of these traditions. Therefore they rank as independent opinions, for with respect to the actual traditions, even the Masters had to receive them from their masters. ');">²</span>

א"ר אבהו עשרה דברים יש בין דיני ממונות לדיני נפשות וכולן אין נוהגין בשור הנסקל חוץ מעשרים ושלשה

R. Abbahu said: In ten respects do civil suits differ from capital charges,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As detailed in the Mishnah. ');">³</span> and none of those is practised in [the trial of] the ox that is stoned,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though its trial must be similar to that of its owner. Cf. supra 2a. ');">⁴</span>

מנא הני מילי אמר רב אחא בר פפא דאמר קרא (שמות כג, ו) לא תטה משפט אביונך בריבו משפט אביונך אי אתה מטה אבל אתה מטה משפט של שור הנסקל

save that twenty-three [judges are necessary] — Whence is this derived? — R. Aha b. Papa said: Scripture states, Thou shalt not wrest<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'incline', or 'bend'. ');">⁵</span> the judgment of thy poor in his cause;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXIII, 6. This is interpreted, judgment must not be inclined in favour of conviction by a majority of only one. ');">⁶</span>

עשרה הא ט' הוו הא עשרה קתני משום דאין הכל כשרין ועשרים ושלשה חדא היא

— the judgment of thy poor thou mayest not wrest,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By a majority of one, for condemnation. ');">⁷</span> but thou mayest do so in the case of the ox that is stoned.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From this it may be inferred that the procedure in the trial of an ox to be stoned is other than that of capital cases, except in the number of judges; and that difference is extended to all the other peculiarities of capital procedure, since the object of particularly applying that procedure in capital cases was to achieve the acquittal of the accused. Not so with an ox. ');">⁸</span>

הא איכא אחריתי דתניא אין מושיבין בסנהדרין זקן וסריס ומי שאין לו בנים ר' יהודה מוסיף אף אכזרי וחילופיהן במסית דרחמנא אמר (דברים יג, ט) לא תחמול ולא תכסה עליו:

Ten? But there are only nine! ([You say that there are only nine,] but indeed, ten are taught! — The laws that not all [persons] are eligible,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., bastards may not try capital cases. ');">⁹</span> and that twenty-three judges are necessary, are but one.)<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So making the total of nine given in the Mishnah. People of illegitimate birth are ineligible as judges in capital cases because a court of twenty-three holds the status of a minor Sanhedrin, with whom pure descent is essential; hence they are counted as one. ');">¹⁰</span>

הכל כשרין לדון דיני ממונות: הכל לאתויי מאי אמר רב יהודה לאתויי ממזר

— There is yet another [difference]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which completes the number of ten. ');">¹¹</span> for it has been taught: 'We do not appoint as members of the Sanhedrin, an aged man, a eunuch or one who is childless.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because such are more or less devoid of paternal tenderness Cf. Tosef Sanh. VII and X. ');">¹²</span>

הא תנינא חדא זימנא כל הראוי לדון דיני נפשות ראוי לדון דיני ממונות ויש ראוי לדון דיני ממונות ואין ראוי לדון דיני נפשות והוינן בה לאתויי מאי ואמר רב יהודה לאתויי ממזר חדא לאתויי גר וחדא לאתויי ממזר

R. Judah includes also a cruel man. It is the reverse in the case of a Mesith,' for the Divine Law states, Neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XIII, 9. ');">¹³</span> ALL ARE ELIGIBLE TO TRY CIVIL SUITS. What does 'ALL' include? — It includes a bastard. But have we not already learnt this once, viz.: Whoever is competent to try capital charges is also competent to try civil suits. But some are competent to try civil suits, yet not capital charges.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 27b. ');">¹⁴</span>

וצריכ' דאי אשמעינן גר דראוי לבא בקהל אבל ממזר אימא לא ואי אשמעינן ממזר דבא מטיפה כשרה אבל גר דלא בא מטיפה כשרה אימא לא צריכא:

Now, when we discussed this question: What does that<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The law that one may be competent to act as judge in one and not in another case. ');">¹⁵</span> include? Did not Rab Judah answer, It includes a bastard? — One includes a proselyte, the other, a bastard. And both are necessary. For had the rule been given concerning a proselyte only, [one might have assumed that the reason is] because he is eligible to come into the Congregation;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., to intermarry with Israelites. ');">¹⁶</span>

ואין הכל כשרין לדון דיני נפשות: מאי טעמא דתני רב יוסף כשם שב"ד מנוקין בצדק כך מנוקין מכל מום אמר אמימר מאי קרא (שיר השירים ד, ז) כולך יפה רעיתי ומום אין בך

but a bastard,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who may not come into the Assembly. Cf. Deut. XXIII, 3 ');">¹⁷</span> we would say, is not [competent]. Again, had this been stated of a bastard only, [we should think that the reason was that] he issues from a proper origin,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., is of pure Israelitish blood. ');">¹⁸</span>

ודילמא מום ממש אמר רב אחא בר יעקב אמר קרא (במדבר יא, טז) והתיצבו שם עמך עמך בדומין לך

but a proselyte, who does not issue from a proper origin, is not [competent]. Hence the statements are [both] necessary. BUT NOT ALL ARE ELIGIBLE TO TRY CAPITAL CHARGES. Why?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the Talmud does not ask, 'whence is this derived,' as before, but 'why', it may be assumed that this limitation is a Rabbinical one, and therefore the Talmud asks why it was imposed. ');">¹⁹</span>

ודילמא התם משום שכינה אלא אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר קרא (שמות יח, כב) ונשאו אתך אתך בדומין לך ליהוי:

— As R. Joseph learned: Just as the <i>Beth din</i> must be pure in righteousness, so they must be free<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'pure'. ');">²⁰</span> from every blemish.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of family descent. ');">²¹</span>

<big><strong>מתני'</strong></big> סנהדרין היתה כחצי גורן עגולה כדי שיהו רואין זה את זה ושני סופרי הדיינין עומדים לפניהם אחד מימין ואחד משמאל וכותבין דברי (מחייבין ודברי מזכין) ר' יהודה אומר שלשה אחד כותב דברי המזכין ואחד כותב דברי המחייבין והשלישי כותב דברי המזכין ודברי המחייבין

Amemar said: What verse [proves this]? — Thou art all fair, my love, and there is no blemish in thee.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cant. IV, 7. [This verse must refer to the Sanhedrin, as such a praise can hardly be sung of the whole people (Yad Ramah).] ');">²²</span> But perhaps a literal defect [blemish] is meant?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., a bodily defect. ');">²³</span> — R. Aha b. Jacob answered: Scripture states, That they may stand there with thee:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. IV, 16. ');">²⁴</span> 'with thee' implies, like to thee.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Elders were required to be like Moses with regard to family descent. ');">²⁵</span> But perhaps it was so stated there on account of the <i>Shechinah</i>?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That passage explicitly states that the Shechinah was to rest upon them. Cf. Num. XI, 17. And I will take of the spirit which is upon thee and put it upon them; therefore, purity of descent was indispensable, but elsewhere, this may be unnecessary. ');">²⁶</span> — But, said R. Nahman b. Jacob: Scripture states, And they shall bear with thee:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XVIII, 22, with reference to the judges set up on the advice of Jethro, to bear with Moses the burden of the people. In that passage there is no indication of the bestowal of the divine spirit upon them. ');">²⁷</span> 'with thee' implies that they must be like to thee. <b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. THE SANHEDRIN SAT IN THE FORM OF A SEMICIRCULAR THRESHING FLOOR,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In Krauss, Sanhedrin-Makkot [1933] a.l. this is discussed at great length. In fact, most threshing floors were round, but their essential feature was that they were shaped like a trough. i.e., forming a depression in the soil. It is to this aspect of the threshing floor that they are compared. Hence the meaning of the passage is: They sat in semi-circular rising tiers, as in an amphitheatre. ');">²⁸</span> SO THAT THEY MIGHT SEE ONE ANOTHER, AND TWO JUDGES CLERKS STOOD BEFORE THEM, ONE TO THE RIGHT, THE OTHER TO THE LEFT, AND WROTE DOWN THE ARGUMENTS OF THOSE WHO WOULD ACQUIT AND THOSE WHO WOULD CONDEMN.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' They were two, as a precautionary measure against error. Cf. supra 34a. ');">²⁹</span> R. JUDAH SAID: [THERE WERE] THREE: ONE TO RECORD THE ARGUMENTS FOR ACQUITTAL, A SECOND, THOSE FOR CONVICTION, AND A THIRD, TO RECORD THE ARGUMENTS FOR ACQUITTAL AND CONVICTION.